Our primary use case is to have a monitoring solution for our managed service clients. That was something we were offering, but we weren't really doing well on that front, in terms of having a proactive monitoring solution. That was the primary pain point we were trying to fix.
Network Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Enables us to offer better proactive support, thanks to alerting and integration
Pros and Cons
- "Auvik has a dynamic mapping feature. Once you get things loaded, it will show you how everything is connected. It also shows the alerts on that map, making it a very quick and human-readable way to dig into it. Overall, that visualization is really nice, especially the dynamic facet."
- "The time-to-value was instantaneous, and once we got the deployment done, it immediately allowed us to better support networks in a proactive manner."
- "I would like to see more extensive syslog capabilities. It can ingest syslogs and I think it can alert based on quantities of messages. You can also look back at some of the messages, but it's not a forensics level syslog."
- "I would like to see more extensive syslog capabilities."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
The main benefit is that we are able to offer better proactive support. Previously, we would deploy a lot of Meraki firewalls and we wouldn't really have proactive support on that. Meraki only offers email alerting, so alerts would come in by email and we wouldn't see them and we'd have to devise other means. With Auvik, we provide a quicker turnaround time for network issues.
It also enables our lower-tier techs to support everything. Normally, especially on the network side, the lower-tier techs are not as able when it comes to conceptualizing the network and visualizing how it's set up. Auvik's dynamic mapping really helps flesh that out. Even less-technically-oriented clients are able to look at Auvik and understand how their network is functioning, at least at a basic level.
In addition to the overall efficiency improvements due to the proactive alerting and the dynamic mapping, the ease of exporting the data that Auvik provides is a big benefit. There are several options throughout the product that allow you to export your data as an Excel spreadsheet. That means you can get the data that Auvik is using to show you everything. That makes it very easy to do asset inventory or to assess the end-of-life of certain products. It takes a lot of the human involvement out of those processes.
Also, in the past, there was a lot of effort that we'd have to put into keeping assets and inventory up to date, and it was mostly through manual data entry. Auvik cuts a lot of that out. Once you have the network monitoring set up, it has all that data that we would normally have to manually enter into ConnectWise, specifically. Now, that information can carry over automatically. So instead of having to do 10 or 15 clicks, and a bunch of typing for each configuration, you just get the network monitoring set up and set up the inventory syncing, and it happens in a couple of minutes.
By keeping inventories up to date, it saves us time. We heavily utilize ConnectWise configurations for determining contract renewals and we're able to focus more on that aspect, and less on ensuring accurate counts.
Another benefit is the ability to use the connector as a "jump-box "and get into other devices. Previously, we would have to either VPN into a network or get into the network through some other remote means, to troubleshoot and configure. But with Auvik, you have the ability to do quick, one-off troubleshooting commands. A technician can do that. You can also get into all the network devices and computers through Auvik itself.
And given the way it alerts, and how it shows the product, it does produce a lower mean time to resolution.
What is most valuable?
Auvik has a dynamic mapping feature. Once you get things loaded, it will show you how everything is connected. It also shows the alerts on that map, making it a very quick and human-readable way to dig into it. Overall, that visualization is really nice, especially the dynamic facet. You don't have to make those connections manually. Auvik does all that automatically. The mapping is very intuitive. The filters have a little learning curve, but even the part that isn't immediately intuitive is not hard to pick it up.
Other useful features are the typical ones, like configuration management. It will keep track of configuration changes on devices and log them.
The alerting is also definitely important. The solution integrates well with ConnectWise Manage and with Opsgenie, which we use for alerting techs after-hours.
It primarily monitors network devices by SNMP and command-line interface. They only charge for network devices, such as wireless LAN controllers, firewalls, switches, and routers, but they'll also grab and monitor printers through SNMP, Windows devices, and Windows hypervisors through WMI credentials.
Auvik also has a really good feature for keeping device inventories up to date. We haven't used it too much, because of the way that we've set it up. Auvik ends up overriding some of the stuff we do internally, but it has a very good way of keeping assets and inventory up to date. The most useful is the ConnectWise integration. It can find certain values, like serial numbers and it will either produce it if it doesn't exist or create a configuration in ConnectWise to match the device. It's really good for keeping all of our products up to date with the information.
What needs improvement?
I would like to see more extensive syslog capabilities. It can ingest syslogs and I think it can alert based on quantities of messages. You can also look back at some of the messages, but it's not a forensics level syslog.
Also, when it comes to mapping and visualizations, there are some imperfections. If Auvik can't exactly deduce how something is connected, it will show an inferred connection and that makes the map a little messy, but with the preset filters, which you can use to only look at network devices or known connections, you can get all the clutter out of there. Overall, it does a great job, but it would be nice if it had a better export feature. You can export it in a usable format, but it's not on the level of a Visio drawing, if you are trying to produce a network diagram. There's a lot of "in-Auvik" usability, but not necessarily outside of Auvik.
Buyer's Guide
Auvik Network Management (ANM)
October 2026
Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2026.
916,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using Auvik for a little over a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We have had no issues of note, in terms of stability. There may have been one incident, but it was so minor that we don't even remember it. We have not had outage issues. They're usually pretty good about notifying you about outages and, usually, there are no adverse effects.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is great. It's designed for an MSP, so adding more clients is extremely easy. We have yet to have an issue. Granted, we're probably not one of their larger deployments. Maybe at scale, when you get bigger, there are some issues, but so far, with our setup, we've never had any issues with scalability.
It is a cloud solution with an on-prem agent that you deploy at each site. We have it deployed for about 30 clients, and there are multiple collectors per client.
How are customer service and support?
So far, the tech support has been great. The only issue is that they have up to a 24-hour turnaround. Typically it's not that long but it's only available during business hours. For any type of issue we have, we can typically wait that long.
There would be an issue if a high-paying client had some sort of emergency situation.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were dabbling in PRTG Network Monitor. We were not using it in the same way but we would use it for occasional troubleshooting and gathering the same kind of data. That was what we would recommend before having our own product: to do a PRTG instance, given they give you the first 100 sensors for free, which covers a lot of niche issues.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is a straightforward process. After the Auvik code is implemented, it starts to populate network mapping within 10 minutes. Our average time for a full deployment is about an hour and a half.
At a lot of the places where we initially put it in, we didn't have great documentation on what was in that environment or how to get into the devices. If that information is already there, and especially if you have already had a solution in place, it should take less than an hour to get a site completely into Auvik.
There is no maintenance of the solution required at our end. Our support team of about 10 utilizes Auvik pretty frequently in the day-to-day. And client-facing managerial types, like chief information officers, use it quarterly to pull data and information. Other users include anyone else who needs to do troubleshooting or needs information. We have systems and network administrators who occasionally look at it, just to get a feel for the network.
What was our ROI?
The time-to-value was instantaneous. Once we got the deployment done, it immediately allowed us to better support networks in a proactive manner.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We were looking at a few options but it was hard finding the right balance. Some options had a lot of customization and you could get into the nitty-gritty. LogicMonitor was the primary example, but price-wise it was too much.
The other ones were open source and would have taken too much of a personnel investment. We would have had to dedicate someone to the role of understanding, maintaining, and updating the product.
Auvik hit a really good middle ground in that it had the usability and the features that we needed. And it's updated by them so we just have to use it. It's really an ideal solution given our setup.
Another reason that we picked Auvik was that its pricing is very good. The only non-open-source solution that had better pricing was PRTG, but Auvik had it beat in ease of use. All-around, Auvik has a really great price for the market.
In addition, the cloud aspect of Auvik is extremely useful in that we don't have to worry about downtime. We had a bunch of on-prem appliances at our main site, which wasn't really set up to be a data center. There would often be issues with unexpected downtime that would affect us, client-wide. Having Auvik in the cloud helped us immensely. Not having to worry about the infrastructure or the updates definitely takes a load off of our team. Those are areas where we previously had to put in notable effort.
The deployment of Auvik is much quicker than PRTG, given how PRTG sets up its agents. And once you pay for Auvik, there is no additional cost. SolarWinds is a little more complex and doesn't fit the same niche as Auvik. SolarWinds is more focused on a single enterprise, whereas Auvik is more MSP-focused.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Centralized Services Team Leader at Morefield Communications
It gives us better insights into network device performance, so we can proactively catch issues before they become serious problems
Pros and Cons
- "Auvik gives us better insights into network device performance, so we can proactively catch issues before they become serious problems."
- "I don't like how Auvik handles their multi-site and site terminology compared to other tools."
How has it helped my organization?
Auvik gives us better insights into network device performance, so we can proactively catch issues before they become serious problems. Auvik also makes us more efficient by providing automated network maps and allowing us to automate low-priority tasks like configuration backups for firewalls and switches. That's a big one. We used to have to do that manually.
The solution's ease of use is essential because our company is split up into different operating groups. We have an IT and network team. This tool allows people who aren't necessarily familiar with firewalls and other IT solutions to get more information at a glance. You don't need to know the ins and outs of a Cisco ASA to figure out what's happening. It also has historical graphs and other features that are helpful for troubleshooting.
Our customers are distributed and remote, and Auvik helps our onsite engineers support them effectively. It improves our IT support's overall availability because we can detect problems earlier. It's easier to fix something before it's broken completely.
What is most valuable?
Auvik's automated network mapping has been helpful because we no longer need to do it manually. It can also monitor router switches, switch stacks, firewalls, and controllers. Auvik has a few other features that are nice to have, like the ESXI monitoring. The ability to monitor printer status, toner level, and aspects like that is also helpful. It fits our need for SNMP monitoring and then some.
I love Auvik's tools for visualizing the network mapping topology. Network visualization is relatively intuitive. It can get cumbersome on a larger network, but it lets you filter the map. If you aren't using any filters and have 1,000 devices, the network is just a bunch of tiny dots that you can't see. At that point, it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack, so you have to use the filters and zoom in. In my opinion, it's functioning as designed.
What needs improvement?
I don't like how Auvik handles their multi-site and site terminology compared to other tools. The sites are customers, and the multi-sites are generally partner accounts, but it could also be a customer account with multiple sites underneath it. Their documentation isn't clear on what to use in which scenario. It's up to your best judgment.
Other RMM tools like ConnectWise Automate have customers and sites. Auvik refers to customer accounts as the "multi-site," and the sites underneath are their actual sites unless you have a reason not to set it up that way. Then you can have all the sites under one site. It's confusing.
I also think Auvik's integration with ConnectWise Manage could use some additional features for excluding certain configuration types. We have that turned off because it's overriding configurations when we don't want it to. I believe the ability to exclude those configuration types is on Auvik's roadmap.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've been using Auvik for about a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I don't need to contact support often, so that's a good performance indicator. I haven't had to troubleshoot it since the initial deployments. Usually, it's something like a particular device that doesn't have something enabled.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Auvik is suitable for most MSP use cases depending on the size and maturity of the MSP. It's an excellent fit for the average MSP. I manage 60 environments with 412 devices. The device coverage varies.
How are customer service and support?
I rate Auvik support eight out of 10. I can't complain. They were able to fix my issues whenever I had them. I never had any long-standing tickets.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
In the past, we were primarily a ConnectWise shop. Automate does network mapping and SNMP monitoring, but it leaves a lot to be desired and requires a lot of manual configuration.
We started looking into tools like Auvik and LogicMonitor. Ultimately, we went with Auvik because we felt like it was a good fit. The price was right, and it had all the features that we needed. We weren't using ConnectWise Automate's probe functionality often because there was too much setup involved. I would say it's more akin to us coming from nothing to something.
How was the initial setup?
Auvik is relatively easy to use and deploy. If you're doing it as a Windows service, you can deploy the collector in under five minutes, but setting it up on a virtual machine might take around an hour. After you set it up, you need to configure it to scan the different subnets.
You have to supply credentials and set the devices up to be monitored. It's reasonably straightforward. If we're deploying it for a net-new customer, we can usually get it done in an afternoon, depending on the customer size. Everything works out of the box, but we needed to set up integration with tools like Manage, ITGlue, and Opsgenie.
It's somewhat hard to estimate the onboarding time because we did it for us first as the MSP, then we onboarded many customers within the first month. It depends on the size of the customer, but it took about six hours.
There's a lot of work to do in the beginning. You have to fine-tune the alerts, which are slightly noisy when you first set it up. That part took a couple of months. We were starting from a blank slate because it was a new solution. We left the default settings and then adjusted them as we went along. It was a little bit of work spread out over a couple of months as we figured out what we did and didn't need.
After that, we didn't need to do much to maintain the tool. You have to check every time you add a new device to ensure it can be scanned. However, if configured correctly, the device will show up automatically when it scans again.
What about the implementation team?
We just did the onboarding through Auvik.
What was our ROI?
I don't have metrics about the return on investment, but Auvik's SaaS model saves us the cost and hassle of maintaining the infrastructure to host the solution. Auvik's team handles the security, so we're not paying somebody to manage it.
That's the big advantage over an on-prem solution because then you have to dedicate resources to management. We only need to manage the configuration of the SaaS solution. We started to see value from the solution as soon as we deployed it because it met an immediate need. We were searching for a solution to proactively monitor networks. Auvik satisfied that need and more.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Auvik is worth every penny. I thought it was fairly priced compared to tools like LogicMonitor, which are a lot more expensive. It's reasonably priced for the market.
What other advice do I have?
I rate Auvik eight out of 10. Before deploying Auvik, you should check to ensure it integrates with all your current solutions, including your RMM, documentation tools, and PSA. That's crucial because it's automating inventory and configuration updates. It integrates with ConnectWise Manage, ConnectWise Automate, ITGlue, Opsgenie, and Meraki, but I'm unsure which solutions are incompatible.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Other
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Buyer's Guide
Auvik Network Management (ANM)
October 2026
Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2026.
916,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
System Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
It's helpful if you're trying to troubleshoot and the documentation isn't a hundred percent up to date
Pros and Cons
- "With TrafficInsights, we can view the information and do something with it. In the past, we couldn't easily find that information."
- "Auvik is easy to use and provides us with an abundance of information."
- "Auvik could have better compatibility with more devices. The devices that we're using are essential within our network infrastructure. It would be great to access the full range of features that some of the other ones do, such as the device configuration backups and the configuration change alert."
- "Auvik could have better compatibility with more devices."
What is our primary use case?
We initially got Auvik to monitor our network devices and equipment mainly for outages and that sort of issue. We have integrated its alert system and email-to-text solution from a local New Zealand telecommunications provider so that our IT staff can get text alerts to their phones. It's quite handy because you're not constantly monitoring your email. So for our different alerts, we get texts now as well as part of that. It might be on the weekend or something like that, and you're not sitting there monitoring your emails, so texts are a bit easier for our on-call IT person to get a text, and then they can check out what's going on.
One of Auvik's services we use is TrafficInsights. It's reasonably new and wasn't around when we first got it. We can feed all the logs into there to see what connections are going and where things are connecting to the environment. It's pretty useful from a security perspective. For example, you can search and see when a specific IP address might have come into your environment if you need it to do an audit or a review. We generally use it for audits or checking where certain things are connecting from around the world. It's a good security feature we can use when we're worried about a device talking to a particular IP address. We can see how long it may have been talking to that. We haven't actually used it for network bandwidth as such.
Auvik also acts as a config register, connecting and pulling the configurations of switches. It's good to have that stored there. If we need to restore or roll back to a particular config, those are saved somewhere else in addition to saving it manually before we make changes.
How has it helped my organization?
Auvik has definitely saved us time. You don't have to go to a room somewhere and figure out what's under what. It's scanned, so it shows you everything, including what interfaces are hooked into what devices. If you didn't have that, you'd need to go into a room to look at a fizzled connection and find where it plugs into. Auvik has decreased our average time-to-resolution. For example, if we have an internet outage in our office. In that case, it shows that an internet connection has gone offline and tells us when we've got a failover internet circuit with different providers.
In the past, we wouldn't have even been notified if we swapped over to one of the other internet connections. When troubleshooting, we know right away when something isn't working or hasn't come up online. We can see which connection is active or current and which is offline. I can't say precisely how much time we've saved using Auvik, but from a year's perspective, I've probably saved a couple of weeks' worth of time. It's reduced the amount of time I spend manually performing tasks like documentation, mapping things out, and troubleshooting. Auvik's features help us address issues before they become a problem for our users. For example, we have a resource usage alert that pops up when there's a sudden increase so we can jump on it. We can stop a non-essential service from taking up a lot of resources and could potentially freeze the server or device. It saves a lot of time addressing the issue after the fact while preventing potential impacts and outages.
It includes automated out-of-the-box device configuration backups for most things, including most generic Cisco functionalities. These have also saved us time. Before I joined the company, they had a separate service for that. They were paying for something else on top of other solutions. Having that all in the one system saves time as well. You don't have to worry about doing it manually. When we make changes to devices, it automatically rolls over to the next one. You can have a log of the dates and times when it changed, and you can set up notifications for when the configuration changes. You can investigate if it changes when it shouldn't have. Without that, you wouldn't even know it has changed without looking at it, but then I don't think you would anyway.
Our team is pretty small. We only have a small IT shop within our business, but we still have our services with Auvik. It makes it easier for them to fix problems quickly without trolling around and finding other documentation. They can jump in there and see the alerts on that map, giving a bit more information. It saves the rest of the team from constantly having to look at the networking.
What is most valuable?
Auvik is easy to use and provides us with an abundance of information. It can show what devices are connected to the network and the specific interface that it's connected to, saving us a lot of time. It's helpful if you're trying to troubleshoot and the documentation isn't a hundred percent up to date, like if you take over from someone else, and there's no documentation about how a specific device connects. If it's in Auvik and the network is set up, you can jump in there and find what it's connected to. It even maps it out for you in a pretty little diagram at the top.
It's comprehensive. You load up a network, and it picks up pretty much everything. That makes it easier to use without having to do too much pumping. In terms of discovery, we only use it for certain things, such as our network gear and our servers. It picks up everything. You do have to do a bit of filtering and some tie-up to make sure you're not seeing stuff you don't want for your specific use case, but that comes down to what different people use it.
Auvik is constantly scanning automatically in the background, and if there's a new device in the network, it'll pick it up. You have to make sure that you have credentials or the right port sector so it can pull the correct information. It may be able to see the device, but it may not necessarily get the information from it.
TrafficInsights has helped us identify and troubleshoot performance issues. When we're doing maintenance, you can monitor it live and ensure that the performance isn't being affected too much. If it is, we can pause and decide to reschedule when there's not so much going on. With TrafficInsights, we can view the information and do something with it. In the past, we couldn't easily find that information. We'd have to dig through individual policies or logs, like on a firewall, for example, whereas it's now all in one place. That made it easier to be able to view that rather than clicking and moving between multiple places.
What needs improvement?
Auvik could have better compatibility with more devices. The devices that we're using are essential within our network infrastructure. It would be great to access the full range of features that some of the other ones do, such as the device configuration backups and the configuration change alert. But there are always new devices coming out, so they have to work through getting the compatibility in the first place.
It makes too many attempts to connect to devices when it's online. You want real-time alerting and that sort of thing, so it has a lot of active connections going on behind the scenes. It creates quite a bit of talk on the network when it's connecting to a device. When it's trying to connect to one for the first time, it tries all the credentials you have saved within your credential library, and that isn't always ideal. If you're on the device, you can see that there have been a lot of failed login attempts because it's just trying another credential that it shouldn't use.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've been using Auvik for about a year and a half.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
When we need Auvik, it's there. There is quite a lot of maintenance that goes on behind the scenes. We get alerts when Auvik is unavailable due to maintenance, but that's also a good thing in cybersecurity threat environments these days. Being in IT ourselves, we know how important that is.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It's simple to scale up because you can add a whole network or office environment into it quickly. If you don't need it anymore, you can delete it. It's very scalable.
How are customer service and support?
I would rate Auvik support eight out of 10. I've opened a couple of support tickets when we've needed certain things. They respond pretty quickly. We've also had chats with them throughout the setup process. The account managers have helped us get questions answered or pointed us in the right direction.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before I joined the company, they had a PRTG system, which is similar in terms of the overall goal. But I had Auvik, which is a lot easier. It's all there. As long as you've got the network and a user to connect to something, then you're basically on your way, and you don't need to do much with the collectors either, which is the thing that talks and you install it and make sure it can talk to the right places on the network. You pretty much let it do its own thing.
Ease of use and functionality were probably the main things that made us switch. PRTG is a product that requires you to set up a lot of things manually. There wasn't specific device compatibility. It was just standards, whether it was the way a device connected or the protocols through which it is connected to the device to pull the information. Auvik sets things up and has specific compatibilities with devices and a much nicer view to see the information that the old product didn't have.
How was the initial setup?
Setting up Auvik is straightforward. It has decent documentation and specific instructions on how to configure it to work with compatible devices. You're not trying to follow some document for a completely different device and apply it to your device. There's lots of information to use to help you with that configuration process as well.
I can't say precisely how long it took to set up, but you can get a whole network mapped out pretty quickly. I've set up a few offices around the country. It took me a couple of hours to get everything fully monitored and plug the information in. To set it up, all you do is check a network, scan, and get some credentials. That takes less than an hour. Then you're just waiting for the information to start going in. With other products, you sometimes don't even know where to start, to be honest. If I were trying to do the same thing on another solution, I might end up spending an extra day on it for the same sort of setup, whether that's a whole office environment or setting it up from scratch.
We did the implementation ourselves. In the first year, there was a local reseller who sold it to us, but they didn't help us implement it. We have a four-person team for everything, so we take turns doing different things. In terms of maintenance, there isn't a lot we need to do on our side. Once we've got it set up and doing what we need, then there isn't a considerable amount. The only time we need to perform any maintenance is when we're setting up new equipment. On the other side, Auvik does its maintenance. So we'll get emails about them completing maintenance and the service availability and that sort of thing.
What was our ROI?
It's hard for me to estimate the return because I don't know what that service costs, but Auvik has replaced the separate service we formerly used for device configuration as well as our old network monitoring solution. I don't know the difference in cost between Auvik and our old solution, but Auvik saves a lot of time, and time is money.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I'd say Auvik's price is reasonable. I don't know how much we paid for the old one, so I can't compare the two. But I think it's a good value, considering all the time saved and the information you can get from it. The license is billed according to the number of network devices. It bills you based on a few specific types of devices, like switches, routers, and other network devices. We're not even using all of our device allotment at the moment. I think Windows servers and machines and that sort of thing aren't counted as part of that licensing. We aren't charged for servers, I believe. We have a virtual environment, so all of our servers and virtual machines within that aren't part of that licensing scheme.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I think they were looking at about three solutions at the same time. They did a few trials a couple of years back. I can't remember which ones. I think there was a Solomon solution. They decided to go with Auvik because of all the information it displays and the ease of use.
What other advice do I have?
I'd probably give Auvik an eight out of 10 at the moment. We're still waiting for them to become compatible with all of our devices. If they had that compatibility, I'd probably rate it nine or 10. For those thinking about adopting Auvik, I would say go for it.
My advice is to put time into setting up the alerts because that's one of the best parts about it. If you have those alerts set up, it's going to save you a lot of time. You don't even need to go into Auvik to investigate. With that notification, the process comes a behind-the-scenes method for resolving those alerts. You should have a plan so your IT team knows what to do when one of those alerts is triggered.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Network Administrator at Kingman Unified School District
We're able to jump into switches and change the VLANs, and maps are updated almost instantly
Pros and Cons
- "The most valuable features of Auvik are the alerting and monitoring. Those functions mean it easily more than pays for itself. I have it integrated with Slack with multiple channels set up for our IT office. When just about any part goes down that I have assigned in the alerting portion, it will let the right people know within minutes."
- "The most valuable features of Auvik are the alerting and monitoring; those functions mean it easily more than pays for itself."
- "It would be cool if they came out with an app, but running the browser isn't bad."
What is our primary use case?
I use Auvik every day for everything. I can remote-terminal in, meaning I can be anywhere and jump in from my phone and make any changes I need to on switches.
How has it helped my organization?
We have some pretty large energy overhaul stuff going on right now. They're changing out all of our lights and adding big solar panels to all the parking lots at all of our school sites. It's nice being able to use Auvik to jump into those switches and change the VLANs when they need different sensors put in. Having that service is invaluable.
Auvik lets us know about problems before others find them. There have been some instances where I didn't set up an alert correctly, but as soon as I fixed it, it started giving us a heads-up before we got phone calls about the issue. That's the biggest advantage of having it. We don't get those calls nearly as often anymore.
The automation of network mapping frees up my time. I'm the sole network guy. We have some technicians that intermittently have an interest in networking. I have given them basic access to it so they can get in and see the maps, and they get the alerts too, so that they know what is happening at their assigned sites. Suppose a camera is down somewhere. They can go into Auvik because I have it set to hold devices for 10 days. They can see where it was connected and we can check the switch and see what the issue is.
Auvik also updates the maps almost instantly. Within about 30 seconds they're updated.
And in terms of reducing MTTR, we went from having nothing to having something. We would sometimes go a week or a month without knowing about an issue. I am able to track things down faster and implement solutions for things that I would otherwise have had no idea were even a problem in the first place.
The solution provides automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backups, as well. As soon as it starts scanning, it copies the running config on all the network hardware. I'm able to go in and restore them if I need to, but there's no setup for that feature. That has saved us time, absolutely. You can use that same panel to check differences. For example, when there's a configuration update, you can pull the backup and the current running, and run them together and it will highlight any differences.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable features of Auvik are the alerting and monitoring. Those functions mean it easily more than pays for itself. I have it integrated with Slack with multiple channels set up for our IT office. When just about any part goes down that I have assigned in the alerting portion, it will let the right people know within minutes.
It's also straightforward to use. That was one of the reasons I went with Auvik. It has a little link tree on the left side and you can pretty much navigate through the whole system. It's MSP software. Each of our school sites is set up as if it were a separate client. Each has its own webpage, and I can drop down the menu on the left and change to any school site to see its whole page. It's as straightforward as it gets.
The network discovery capabilities are pretty good. You do have to go in and allot permissions to scan separate subnets. If someone doesn't know what they're doing, they're not going to know how to get it to discover the networks. As long as you know what subnets you're supposed to be scanning, it's as easy as clicking a checkbox and hitting "Scan."
What needs improvement?
It would be cool if they came out with an app, but running the browser isn't bad.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using Auvik for just over a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability is great. They're really consistent in sending out notifications about any maintenance windows or updates that they're rolling out.
The only time I've had a false positive from Auvik is when our VM has gone down, the one that's running the collector. That will cause a bunch of things to pop off here and there. But I've cleaned that up on our end.
There was recently an issue with logging in, but they were on top of it within minutes and then they had a whole status web page about it. I can't complain at all about the stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Because it runs from a VM collector and it's fast, I could add another site if I wanted to and it would take me minutes.
In terms of increasing our usage of Auvik, we have a site that's running from a different ISP and I'm having issues remotely managing it. As soon as I'm able to get that straightened out, I'll be adding that entire site to our service.
How are customer service and support?
Their technical support is awesome. They're proactive. If there's anything going on, they let me know by sending me emails. And if I ever need to hit them up, they're super quick. We have a designated rep and she's pretty responsive.
They recently added an idea portal. If I come across an idea or something that I want them to add in, I can throw it in there. Users then up-vote or down-vote ideas and Auvik chooses to implement them or not after that.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We had SolarWinds and then something happened to our database, internally, that we were using to manage it. We then went to having no monitoring at all for about two years. When I took over, we got with Auvik. So technically, we replaced all of SolarWinds' services with Auvik.
How was the initial setup?
The setup was really straightforward. When we were doing the proof of concept, I went through their resources and got their certification by following their courses. And I pretty much did the entire deployment by myself, with a little help from their sales rep. But it was super straightforward. It took about 10 minutes.
The setup was super easy compared to others that I've done. With Auvik you're just putting a service on a VM. Depending on how large your network is you might need more VMs or more services running, but that's literally it.
And as a cloud-based solution it requires zero maintenance.
What was our ROI?
The time to value is great. We were up and running within an afternoon.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
They charge for switches and some networking hardware, but everything else is free. In our environment there are a lot of things that we aren't billed for by Auvik. We're almost one-for-one on students. APs and cameras are shown by IP address in Auvik. It doesn't tell you exactly what that device is, but it does tell you there's something there and where it's connected in the maps. You can monitor any workstation using the service. If you can name them it makes it a lot easier to keep track of them. Intercom systems are included as well. All of those devices are not billed and we have thousands and thousands of those kinds of devices.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We had to look at other options. We checked out SolarWinds and we also evaluated NinjaRMM and PRTG. The latter teamed up with NetBrain and together they do network automation ticketing.
SolarWinds and NinjaRMM were significantly more expensive, although they did do more. But they were more server-related and covered more of that end. Auvik is more network-centric and checked more boxes, in terms of what I was looking for, than the others.
What other advice do I have?
Give Auvik a shot. Do the demo. It doesn't take long to do the proof of concept. And during the proof of concept they give you access to their resources so you can go in and do that Auvik certification. The most important part of that is being able to go through all of their material and really see what they're capable of. During the demo you can dig deep.
I love it. I use it every day, multiple times a day.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Director of Information Technology at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Alerts us to high bandwidth usage or increased latency, enabling us to proactively react before users notice any impact
Pros and Cons
- "The alerting feature has been a very key piece for us, especially in the data center because we manage it ourselves... Within the data center, we have an RDS farm that all the users from the facility connect to. Whenever something may be slow, we can look at the alerting and it helps us troubleshoot whether the issue is at the facility level or at an infrastructure level."
- "All the aspects it helps us with make it phenomenal."
- "The deployment of the probe onto a particular device could be improved. That usually requires one of our level-two people to step in from the help desk team. It would be much better if it were a click-and-go deployment. What I would like to see in particular is the ability to download an MSI builder for a probe for a particular building. We would simply double-click and install it onto the machine and have it work. Having to roll through with the entire API key is a little time-consuming."
- "The deployment of the probe onto a particular device could be improved."
What is our primary use case?
We're in the healthcare industry and in our organization we have what we call a "backup machine" to be used in emergency scenarios. Should there be a brownout or internet service provider disruptions or any major catastrophe, we can move digital charting to paper charting for a certain duration of time. We have the Auvik probe installed on those backup machines, and it sends feedback back to the main Auvik dashboard where we monitor such things as ISP latency, devices on the network, and certain network elements like switches and access points.
We also have a probe sitting in one of the servers in the data center and it performs a similar function, helping us review our network infrastructure within the data center and to see where potential bottlenecks are, at what times of day, and to analyze trends.
We use it for basic troubleshooting as well because you can see everything on the network within a particular facility. At sites that don't have Cisco Meraki within the building, we use Auvik to isolate which ports' devices are connected to and for general troubleshooting. If, for example, an uplink port on one of the switches goes out, we can see, "Oh, that was port 26. Please switch it to port 25." We can duplicate configurations from one port to the next port and make sure that the facility is up and online.
It's been a very useful tool for us.
How has it helped my organization?
We can automate alerting systems based on certain criteria. For example, if a switch is undergoing high CPU usage or access points show high CPU or memory usage, we'll get the alerts for those and address them accordingly.
Auvik also sends us a text message whenever one of the internet circuits goes down, as we have a main fibre circuit at every building and a coaxial backup. That helps us ease the burden in switching over the necessary connections or the tunnels back to our centralized data center.
In addition, the network discovery capabilities are very insightful, coming from our previous situation where we had absolutely nothing. They have made us aware of certain switches within certain parts of the building that we may not have known existed. They have also helped because in our industry we're built by acquisitions. Oftentimes, we find an acquisition has an IDF and MDF in a particular building. With Auvik installed, we might find there are two more switches around that building. Sometimes these switches can be in the ceiling, but even being able to isolate what port they're connected to, disconnecting them, and finding where these items are has been extraordinarily helpful to us.
The solution has ultimately improved the response time of our help desk team when troubleshooting issues. It has also helped to identify older equipment when doing a refresh. We've been able to find 100-meg switches and old Cisco switches that are in places that we didn't anticipate they would be. We have also been able to isolate key pieces of the infrastructure within a building, pieces that needed to be replaced to provide a more friendly user experience.
Another benefit is that the automation of network mapping enables our level-one network specialists to resolve issues directly, and frees up senior-level team members for more important tasks. Our level-ones have read-only access, but that allows them to see the different topologies, see where things are connected, and then help facilitate a solution, either remotely or with the help of onsite personnel. It's kind of like having Cisco Meraki insight without actually having Cisco Meraki. While we only use Cisco Meraki gear at our HQ location, which provides us a high level of insight within one portal, Cisco Meraki is fairly expensive and it's not something that we can afford to put into every building. Auvik provides us with all the features that Cisco Meraki might have to offer within one pane of glass.
The solution also automatically updates network topology, although it requires SNMP to be enabled on a particular network device. So when we're provisioning things that are going out, we have to pre-program that information into the switch and make sure everything is compatible. But once it's in place, it provides us the same level of insight that the previous network device did.
Also, in the cases where we've used it for resolving issues, it has reduced our MTTR. We're using it more as an insight tool. We don't have a lot of network-related issues within the environment, but in the instances that we have used it for resolution, it has helped us resolve the issues a lot quicker, on the order of 40 percent quicker.
It helps us to put out fires before end-users even know there is a problem, especially when it comes to internet service provider latency on a particular circuit. It alerts us to high bandwidth usage or increased latency and allows us to flip the connections from fibre to coax in anticipation, and then dispatch a fiber technician to resolve the issue on the primary line. All that can be done without any user noticing an impact at the facility level.
We use Auvik's TrafficInsights feature in the data center, but not the facility level. TrafficInsights is really the most beneficial within the data center because that's where high bandwidth is going and that's where it's most important to know exactly what's going on at all times. It shows us network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive, in-line traffic decryption, and with the projects that we currently have on our plate, that's incredibly important. We're currently transitioning data centers right now, and being able to isolate what traffic is going where and what's taking up the most bandwidth helps us put in certain traffic shaping rules. If something were to potentially impact at the facility level, we can get ahead of the curve and make the appropriate changes as necessary.
TrafficInsights also helps show where our system is experiencing performance issues, because we're using fibre optics within the data center as the backbone for everything. Whenever we're moving virtual machines, it helps isolate which ports are experiencing the most usage. We correlate the ports that are used to the host machines themselves and determine what virtual machines are reliant on the host that's using the most bandwidth, and we then see what services are impacted from there. TrafficInsights enables us to prepare ourselves to minimize end-user performance impact. We make changes based on what we see through TrafficInsights. It's a useful feature for doing exactly that. It allows us to maintain a steady level of performance within the data center.
There are also the automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backups which have saved me quite a few times. The ability to back up a configuration from a firewall and have it housed in one central location where we can get the backup config and restore it to a new device, should a firewall or a switch blow out, decreases our restore time significantly. We don't have to figure out which rules, traffic shaping, or port-forwarding were on the switch, or what was on the firewall. We confidently know that the backup being pulled from Auvik is the most recent one.
Typically, before we had Auvik, when a firewall went out, it would take us a full day or a day and a half to turn around another firewall, to make sure it would be plug-and-play. With Auvik, that time has been reduced to a few hours. That's what it takes to procure the actual equipment and get it sent out, because we just pull the backup, restore it, and send the equipment out. No one from our networking team is then working, via tickets, to discover what was on the device previously. It's all in one place. If it's local, we have the building up and running within two hours of equipment configuration.
It's hard to say how much the device configuration backup saves us because every scenario is different. But if we're paying someone $45 an hour, instead of 12 hours of their time we're only using four hours of their time.
What is most valuable?
The alerting feature has been a very key piece for us, especially in the data center because we manage it ourselves. It gives us special insights into how certain projects and migrations are impacting the center of our operations, out in the field. Within the data center, we have an RDS farm that all the users from the facility connect to. Whenever something may be slow, we can look at the alerting and it helps us troubleshoot whether the issue is at the facility level or at an infrastructure level.
Also, the audit logs it provides are very detailed and can be tailored to our needs within the organization for things like management audit logs and user activity. The TrafficInsights have been really helpful.
What needs improvement?
The deployment of the probe onto a particular device could be improved. That usually requires one of our level-two people to step in from the help desk team. It would be much better if it were a click-and-go deployment. What I would like to see in particular is the ability to download an MSI builder for a probe for a particular building. We would simply double-click and install it onto the machine and have it work. Having to roll through with the entire API key is a little time-consuming.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Auvik for about two years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We've never had issues with it until recently when we started to see a lot more maintenance come up because the dashboard might be unavailable. But its uptime is about 99 percent.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability is dependent on cost because they charge by network elements. In some of the nursing homes we handle, it's very cost-effective because they only have three switches, a firewall, and about 20 access points. But in larger facilities that have three or four IDFs, it becomes a little bit more costly because you have the additional switches and access points.
Since we don't have a lot of networking issues within the building itself, Auvik is being used as a general guidance tool, and to help the level-one help desk technicians troubleshoot a couple of things a little bit quicker, figure out where items are attached, and help the onsite maintenance director swap a cable or something of that manner. Our use of Auvik will be expanded based on acquisitions. If we bring on a new nursing home, we'll configure all the equipment into our network ahead of time and it will be plug-and-go. We'll just pay for the additional licensing for the network devices.
How are customer service and technical support?
The first couple of times that I tried to get in contact with the tech support, they were very responsive. With every third-party vendor, wait-times can vary, but the tech support has always been good. I have recently noticed a little bit of a slower response time.
One thing that would be nice would be for them to reach out to us once in a while to check in and see how things are going, rather than only being reactive. A little bit more of a proactive approach would help. Outside of that, I haven't had any issues with their support or their customer team.
Overall, I would rate their tech support at nine out of 10.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We used to use OpenNMS for WAN connectivity purposes but with Auvik we were able to replace that. As far as backups go, we used to use an in-house-built solution for automating an SSH protocol into the firewalls and doing manual backups from there. But that took time to maintain. Auvik has consolidated those two things in one place. And the additional features of network insights for an entire facility is something that we didn't previously have. Auvik is saving us $3,000 to $4,000 per year in licensing costs.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was pretty straightforward. From start to finish, it took us about five days to have the entire environment up and running. We're a fairly small team. For organizations that have more dedicated team members, such as a NOC team and a server team, it would probably be a lot faster. But we were all filling in for those roles.
Our implementation strategy was simply to make sure that we had the different sites built out within the Auvik collector, entering in the IP information for each site, and then installing the probe facility by facility.
There was a time where it was a little confusing to get set up, but Auvik really helped to bridge that gap in knowledge by providing training to our end-users, meaning me or someone on our help desk team. They gave us more in-depth information and helped us to really understand the product features and to ensure that we were using everything to the best of its capabilities within our circumstances.
We have 10 users of Auvik: three system administrators, two level-two help desk technicians, and about five level-one help desk technicians. As a cloud-based solution, once it's deployed, unless we're making certain IP schema changes, it doesn't require much maintenance at all from our staff. On occasion, a backup machine needs to be replaced and we have to reinstall the probe. But outside of that, it's really click-and-go. The Auvik probe will pick up on a new subnet too. It's all available within the dashboard itself. You can literally turn off the old subnet and turn on the new one and begin scanning those elements just like they were before.
What about the implementation team?
We did it on our own.
What was our ROI?
We've seen ROI in terms of the time that Auvik has saved us in the instances where we've had configurations that needed to be cloned, for example. I don't want to say the product is stale, rather it's insightful. You get from it as much as you want to get out of it. For us, the insights, manageability, and troubleshooting go a long way because we're saving man-hours.
When it comes to time-to-value, the setup time is fairly easy and the network discovery is very helpful.
Because we had nothing previously, it's a very valuable tool. Having everything in one place, enabling our teams to react faster, decreasing the time to resolution, as well as identifying weak places within the infrastructure—it's hard to put a value on all that it gives us.
It has saved us a considerable amount of money, given that everything had to be done manually before, such as FaceTiming with a member of the facility and trying to get a physical view of a particular issue. Just having a central pane of glass that easily identifies various pieces of information goes a long way. We're saving tech time which can ultimately then be better spent supporting the organization and end-users. As far as infrastructure planning and rip-and-replace go for certain network technologies, it's provided much better insight and we can plan for which network switches actually have to be replaced. There are cost savings there because if we've got gig switches here and we're only looking to replace 100-meg switches, we can really drill down and know what we need ahead of time, going into a particular building, when we redo some infrastructure.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution is billed per network device, so there are devices that are not subject to billing in your environment, such as dumb switches because they have no higher reporting protocols. If you do have those, Auvik won't report on them in the same way. It won't give you port-based or traffic-based analyses.
There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We initially looked at SolarWinds and, thankfully, we didn't go with that product. Its setup time and configuration were pretty extensive and we never fully finished it after putting about 10 days' worth of time into it. As much as I'd like to say some good things about SolarWinds, it really wasn't for us because of the lack of communication and support that I got from them in helping to set things up. Ultimately, we steered away from that product.
The biggest pro for Auvik is its ease of deployment. It was as easy as I've personally seen a setup of this type of solution to be. It has an abundance of features and functionality. The only con is that the install is a little bit more tech-intensive as far as time goes.
What other advice do I have?
The biggest lesson I have learned from using Auvik is that every organization should have something like this. From our perspective, it isn't very expensive, although in smaller organizations it might be considered more of a luxury. But every luxury has its benefits. All the aspects it helps us with make it phenomenal. It's definitely a "need," not a "want."
I would advise making sure you have a very good, thorough count of the SNMP-enabled devices you have within your network. Also, be cognizant of whether you have any non-managed switches because you can't really get visibility into them.
Also, make sure that you have full control over your network elements within the environment. We had a couple of switches that we had to factory-reset to get back into them, because there were lost credentials. Assuming that your infrastructure and your documentation are good, you really shouldn't run into any terrible issues. If you're sound on documentation, credential handling, and credential guarding, this tool will be very easy for you to implement. And if your infrastructure is pretty sound and everything is consolidated, this will be a phenomenal tool.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Network Engineer at GNCU
Incredibly easy to use, cuts our resolution time, and automatically takes care of configuration management and backups
Pros and Cons
- "It is useful for configuration management and automated backup. It is one of my favorite features because it is low-hanging fruit, and it is easy to accomplish, but on a network where we've got infrastructure devices in hundreds, it is an arduous task to keep on top of. Auvik does it all automatically, so that's probably one of my favorites because it is important, and it just does it automatically. I don't even have to think about it."
- "For an unsophisticated or a very small network team, I would give it a nine out of 10 because of ease of use."
- "Currently, with Auvik's support, I'm troubleshooting some of the information gathered on Cisco devices through SNMP V3. Auvik is not able to pull some of the important information that it uses to draw the map, which is kind of shocking because it is Auvik. So, it is their platform, and it is monitoring Cisco devices, which are obviously very prevalent in the world. Auvik is having a hard time gathering such important information over SNMP V3, which is a networking standard, and on super popular device brand and model. They're actively working with me on that piece. It seems that network device management using SNMP V3 could use a little tuning."
What is our primary use case?
I used to work at a managed service provider, and we needed a network topology mapping solution and discovered Auvik. So, we tried it out, and then we used Auvik until that MSP was bought out. I left the MSP world and became a network engineer at Greater Nevada Credit Union, where I'm now.
We pretty much use it for topology mapping. We use it for mapping out the network and then monitoring the availability of the network infrastructure devices. There is also alerting whenever there are problems. So, we basically use it for monitoring, alerting, and troubleshooting. We also use it for configuration management and automated backup.
It is a managed solution, so they handle all of the platform upgrades and all that stuff. We have got whichever version they have got.
How has it helped my organization?
It alerts us whenever there are problems, such as a site is down, an individual device is offline, or there are performance issues. So, it provides alerting and assists in troubleshooting when there is not a site-wide or a network-wide issue.
When they started it, Auvik was intended to be an MSP-focused tool. So, you set up different networks in Auvik as if they are distinct entities or different companies. I've deployed Auvik such that it treats all of our different locations as different networks, even though everything is basically tied together in one big wide area network. The net effect here is that network discovery is so effective it discovers all of the same subnets over and over again across all different networks that I have configured in Auvik. It normally wouldn't be a problem in an MSP world because those networks are not connected to one another. It is kind of an annoyance for me, but it really just kind of highlights how effective it is. Its discovery mechanism is very effective. I haven't had too many scenarios where Auvik didn't discover a particular subnet. It mostly just boils down to whether or not we've configured the network correctly so that something isn't just like a hidden Easter egg.
Prior to Auvik, we weren't tracking any kind of KPIs relative to the network, performance, uptime, etc. There wasn't even the ability to do that because there just wasn't a solution in place. Now that we've implemented this platform, it has given us the ability to do so after our IT organization reaches that maturity level. The ability is there, and the data is there, but we're not there yet. So, it has given us the ability to track those kinds of KPIs. Beyond that, given that we are a 100% Cisco network, it very simply tracks contract status, support status, and all that stuff. I can very easily run a report and confirm the software and the firmware version that all of the devices are running to make everything consistent and get all of our switches and routers on the standard software version. We're approaching that templatized network look. It is one of the things that I could have done manually. I could physically log in to every device and figure out what they're on and then go through the upgrade process. Now, it's a little bit more simplified because I can just run one report and see that everything is on different versions. I can then standardize the version across the board.
It automatically updates our network topology. There are certain things that we have to do as dictated by the NCUA. We are a credit union, and the NCUA is the federal regulatory body that oversees our operations. When we get audited every six months or so, the NCUA basically has a long list of things that they check. They'll say, "Are you performing configuration backups of your network devices?" I would say that we do, and they would ask me to show it to them. For that, all I got to do is bring up Auvik and say, "Here's the device. Our entire network is managed by this platform, and here is an example of a configuration backup for a particular switch. Here is every configuration that has changed since the platform was implemented." Directly above that pane in the browser window is the topology. One of the other things that they ask about is if we have network topology diagrams to which I say that we have but not in the traditional sense. Once upon a time, most folks just manually maintained Visio diagrams of how the network was physically and logically connected, but you just can't rely on those because of the network changes. In a network of this size, probably not a single day passes when I don't make a configuration change. The help desk folks also go and deploy a new workstation regularly, and Auvik automatically discovers those new devices and automatically updates the maps. So, it is a living document at that point, which makes it useful because it is always accurate. I don't have to manually go in and add a new device.
It has decreased our meantime to resolution primarily because I'm notified of problems much quicker. Previously, if there was a problem, a user would call the help desk to look into it. If the help desk wasn't really sure about what's going on, they escalated it to the network guy. I then looked into it and said, "Oh, I see." Now, instead of that, I'm getting a notification from the tool at the same time a user notices a problem, and then I start looking into it. By the time the help desk hits me up, I'm like, "Yeah, this should be good now." So, in that capacity, it has definitely improved the meantime to resolution. It has probably cut our resolution times in half.
It helps us to put out fires before people/end users even know there is a problem. There have been some scenarios where it has alerted on things, and there was no perceived impact by the end-users. If there was a failed power supply in a switch that maybe had redundant power supplies, we would get a notification that one of those power supplies has died. We can then proactively replace that failed device before the spare tire blows out, and the network goes down.
We're a credit union, and we've got an online banking website, ATMs, ITMs, etc. We have another department that handles all of those member or customer-facing technologies. Previously, if there was a network outage somewhere, it used to be that they were basically unaware of it until they started getting reports that members are calling in and saying that the e-branch is down, and they can't log in to the e-branch. That team does not use Auvik, but I have included them in the outage alerting. So, they get an email when a branch goes down, or there are problems. They don't get notifications for high broadcast traffic, but when there are obvious problems, they get a notification. For example, when a site goes down, we know that the ITMs aren't going to be working, and they're going to get notified at some point by members, but Auvik would have already sent them an alert saying that the XYZ branch is down. So, they can already anticipate that there are going to be ITM issues because the whole site is offline.
It provides automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backups. These are just compulsory administrative tasks for the stuff you rarely need, but if you ever need it and you didn't have it, you're in a big problem. It does the automated backup, and it does it so reliably that I've never manually managed configuration. If I was doing that manually, it would probably take five minutes per device to do a configuration backup. Across a hundred devices, it would be 500 minutes a month. So, it saves me a fair amount of time. It also saves me needing to employ somebody to do a very repetitive task. This is what technology does. It replaces dumb functions so that humans can go and do things that are not so easily automated. The device configuration part also saves money, but the only reason that it saved money was that it was something that we weren't doing before Auvik. We were not spending money to backup configurations because we were not really backing up configurations. So, it didn't really replace anything. It just implemented something that needed to be done but wasn't being done.
It enabled us to consolidate or replace other tools. We got rid of the managed service provider and saved approximately 100K a year, and it replaced SolarWinds and Uptime. Uptime was another platform similar to Auvik, but it was nowhere near as feature-rich. We're paying around 17K a year for Auvik, and SolarWinds and Uptime combined were probably in the neighborhood of 25K a year. So, it has saved around 8K a year.
What is most valuable?
It is useful for configuration management and automated backup. It is one of my favorite features because it is low-hanging fruit, and it is easy to accomplish, but on a network where we've got infrastructure devices in hundreds, it is an arduous task to keep on top of. Auvik does it all automatically, so that's probably one of my favorites because it is important, and it just does it automatically. I don't even have to think about it.
It is incredibly easy to use. That was one of the things that helped motivate. We were basically told that we couldn't use SolarWinds anymore, and we had to adopt something new. I already knew Auvik, but considering that I'm the only network engineer here, the simplicity of the platform was important so that the rest of the IT team could use it to find information. It was important to have an interface that was intuitive and the information that was accessible and usable by folks who weren't networking nerds.
Given that you can deploy it so quickly and so easily, its time to value is very quick. I can start getting meaningful information out of it almost immediately.
What needs improvement?
Sometimes, we get requests for exporting a map of the network. I can export a map, but it exports it as a PDF, which is basically just like a drawing. There is no context. When you're looking at the map, you can hover over things and you can drill in devices and see all kinds of information, but when you export it to a PDF, it is just like a flat image. It is a picture of it, and if you don't know what you're looking at, it doesn't necessarily make any sense. This may be something that has already improved. The exportability piece was one thing that was kind of like a gripe, but it is not all that important. If NCUA wanted to see proof that we have network topology diagrams, I can just show them the tool. Worst case scenario, I can give them read-only access to log into our Auvik tenant, and then they can see for themselves all of that stuff.
Currently, with Auvik's support, I'm troubleshooting some of the information gathered on Cisco devices through SNMP V3. Auvik is not able to pull some of the important information that it uses to draw the map, which is kind of shocking because it is Auvik. So, it is their platform, and it is monitoring Cisco devices, which are obviously very prevalent in the world. Auvik is having a hard time gathering such important information over SNMP V3, which is a networking standard, and on super popular device brand and model. They're actively working with me on that piece. It seems that network device management using SNMP V3 could use a little tuning.
For how long have I used the solution?
I probably started to use it in 2016 or 2017.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is very stable. There were occasions where I got a notification that Auvik failed to pull a device for its configuration information to see if there was a change, and then, it'll magically resolve itself after 15 or 20 minutes. So, there were some instances that made me wonder why that happened, but, generally, it has been very stable. I don't know if I've ever seen an Auvik outage.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is super simple to scale. To add a site, we deploy all of the equipment. After the equipment is deployed, I deploy a collector at that new site, and we're off and running.
The only folks that use the platform are in the IT department, but we've also got another department in the technology wing of the organization. This department handles all of those member or customer-facing technologies, such as online banking website, ATMs, ITMs, etc. They do not use Auvik, but I have included them in the outage alerting. So, they get an email when a branch goes down or there are problems. The cybersecurity team also uses it a little bit, and we also have our systems engineers, who actually manage the server infrastructure. There are probably about 15 users across those different roles.
It is being used everywhere across the entire network. There is nowhere to really increase its usage. As things change, they may warrant increasing its usage. There are probably some opportunities to increase the use with TrafficInsights and things like that.
How are customer service and technical support?
Aside from the ticket that I'm working on right now, I didn't have to reach out to them too much. So, the jury is still out, and we'll see how they do on this. They haven't given up and are still looking into it. So, for now, I would give them a solid eight out of 10.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
When I joined this organization, they didn't have much for monitoring the network, but they had already purchased SolarWinds licensing. When the SolarWinds breach happened, we got a kind of edict from the NCUA to discontinue any relationships that we might have with SolarWinds. So, I said, "Okay, not a problem. I know Auvik." We adopted Auvik, and we've been using Auvik since then.
How was the initial setup?
Its initial setup was very easy. The configurations were already in place on our network devices to allow management over SNMP. All it took was to deploy the tool and then give it the necessary information to begin the network discovery. After that, it just started populating information. So, it was very easy.
Auvik doesn't use anything in terms of how it interacts with the network. It doesn't use any proprietary stuff that you really have to learn. It uses the same protocols that everything else uses. So, there wasn't any complicated platform-specific stuff that we needed to get in place to make it work. Deploying the tool is as simple as installing software or spinning up a virtual machine. It took us about a day. It was very quick.
Its setup was much quicker than other solutions because you don't have to set up the front-end. All you got to do is deploy little collectors. You don't have to set up the interface you interact with or set that server up. That's usually the part that is a real pain because you have to spin up your own servers, and you got to install the software and give it enough resources. The interface is clunky and slow, and you've got to tune the virtual machine. That's obviously applicable to any hosted service, but that was definitely a contributing factor to the speed and the ease of deploying it. It was like everything is there, and you just got to start plugging your information into it and let the collectors discover and plug it in for you.
In terms of the implementation strategy, with Auvik or network monitoring tools, we, sort of, have two different approaches. The first approach is that we can deploy it so that one collector or one group of collectors monitors the entire network, and we have one map that shows the entire network. Prior to working at GNCU, I was working at a managed service provider, and GNCU was one of our customers. I had done a lot of project work for GNCU, but they were not a managed customer. So, we didn't deploy our toolset on their network, and therefore, we didn't have any visibility. However, in order to do some of the project work that I was planning for them, I needed that kind of information. I needed topology, and I needed to know subnets and things like that. So, we temporarily deployed Auvik back then into GNCU's network. We just deployed the collector, and let it discover the entire network. We gave it about a day to go and do all that discovery and draw the whole map out. After that, I kind of realized it was clunky because the map was so big. It was detailing the network that spans around 30 different locations.
Another approach is to break each site down into its own network instead of doing one big network map. This is the approach that we followed when we implemented it at GNCU back in December. In this approach, each site is its own customer, which made the map for each site much smaller. It also made it much easier to navigate and see the things that we wanted to do. So, in the end, this was the approach that we ended up using. It is nice that you have that option instead of having just one way.
In terms of maintenance, it is like a platform. We don't maintain anything there. The only thing that we do is that when we make changes to the network or deploy a new device, we need to go in and make sure that Auvik discovers the new device, and it is able to log in, make a backup of the configurations, and start pulling it over SNMP. The platform itself requires zero maintenance.
In terms of the impact of this level of maintenance on our operations as compared to other solutions I've used in the past, with SolarWinds, when a new version came out, we had set it in a way to kind of automate it to an extent. When an update was available, we would upload it manually, apply it, and make sure that everything was working. It wasn't overly arduous. There were patches, modest updates, and stuff like that. For full version upgrades, a lot of times, it was easier to just deploy a new server, install the new version, and then get it set up. We don't have to do that now. It is almost like a thing that you used to do back in the day before SaaS solutions.
What about the implementation team?
We implemented it ourselves.
What was our ROI?
We have not done an ROI. I also cannot quantify exactly how much it has saved because I don't remember exactly what we were paying for SolarWinds, but it is similar to what we were paying for SolarWinds. When we were using SolarWinds, after we had got it deployed and configured the way that we wanted, we probably wouldn't have ever gone back to Auvik, despite me knowing it and liking Auvik. That's because we had already made the investment in that platform, but then the breach happened, and we had no choice. So, there wasn't a meaningful saving in switching from SolarWinds to Auvik.
Prior to me coming on board, GNCU had kind of outsourced the network part to two different organizations. One of those organizations just did the monitoring and management piece. They were charging us about 100K a year for that managed service. By implementing Auvik, we basically duplicated what they were doing, which has a very measurable impact. I didn't have access to their platform, so I needed something that I could use to monitor and manage the network. So, by getting rid of that managed service provider, we saved approximately 100K a year.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Their licensing model is basically per managed device. You pay X amount per managed device, and managed devices are limited to switches, routers, firewalls, and wireless LAN controllers. So, the only things that we pay for are our switches, routers, firewalls, and wireless LAN controllers, but there are orders of magnitude more devices that Auvik manages that we don't pay for. It also manages servers, workstations, and phones. Auvik will gather KPIs from anything that is connected to the network if it can be managed via a standard like SNMP or WMI. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.
Auvik doesn't nickel-and-dime. SolarWinds nickel-and-dime you to death. Everything has a different license, and you needed that license for every device, no matter what it was, down to even the interface level. It was ridiculous. Auvik does it monthly. So, it is per device and per month with the option to pay annually at some percent savings, which is what we do. We pay annually right now. It is something like 17K dollars a year.
Auvik might have even been a little bit more expensive than SolarWinds, but that was only because we had not added some of the things that Auvik did to the SolarWinds licensing. So, eventually, the SolarWinds product probably would've been a little bit more expensive if it was like an apple to apple comparison in terms of features.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I had checked ThousandEyes. I had also checked Cisco DNA Center, which was more costly, and the network was just not there yet. Some of our devices don't support management via Cisco DNA Center. So, we were not there yet. Someday, I'd like to be able to get there, but for what we needed, Auvik was just the easiest answer.
What other advice do I have?
I would advise others to check it out. It doesn't hurt. They give you a two-week free trial. You can kind of just say that you want to try this, and then, you try it. There is no haggling back and forth with sales. They give you access to the platform for two weeks. For us, I had done the trial just to get it implemented, and then, they extended the trial for us free of charge for another two weeks so that we could get all the approvals in place to adopt the platforms and start paying for it. They make it super easy, so try it out.
The automation of network mapping has enabled junior network specialists to resolve issues directly and freed up senior-level team members to perform higher-value tasks, but it is not because of the tool. It is because of the proficiency level of our team. We don't have junior network staff. There is just me. Our help desk folks are our junior staff, and it is just not in their wheelhouse yet. It goes back to that organizational operational maturity. We've got like the help desk that helps the end-users, and then we've got the engineers who deploy and are kind of like that highest escalation point. It kind of goes from zero to 60. They check something out there, and the help desk will get a ticket saying that it must be a network thing. It just comes right over to me. I'll try to use those opportunities as a teaching opportunity to show, "Hey, log in to Auvik, and then you can see here that the device is online. We've got some other monitoring tools that we use as well for workstations in virtual infrastructure to see that it is not a network issue, and here's how you can dig through Auvik to see it." It increases the proficiency level of our staff. The tools kind of assist with that change and with them improving. A network engineer can tell the help desk guy until he is blue in the face about how things work, but when you have something to kind of visualize, you can look at metrics and performance indicators. It, kind of, helps in providing a little bit of context to the topics that I'm talking about, and then, they can, kind of, use those things. So, the proficiency definitely is improving, and the tool helps with that.
We have not used the TrafficInsights feature. We have a cybersecurity team, and they have a tool called Darktrace, which is TrafficInsights on steroids. It has got some AI or machine learning built into the platform, and it does some really gee-whiz stuff. Because of the presence of that tool, I haven't gone into configuring TrafficInsights yet. It is on my list of things to do because it is just convenient to have all of your data that you might want to access available in one window, as opposed to having to log into another device and learn how to use another device or another tool. So, eventually, I'll get around to that TrafficInsights so that the information is available.
If there is anything that Auvik has taught me, which is also one of my general rules of thumb, is that when something is not working as expected, it is not necessarily a problem related to that thing. For example, if it is a problem that I'm having with Auvik, usually it is not indicative of a problem with Auvik. Similarly, it is not necessarily a problem on the network that is impacting users. It tends to point to something not being configured correctly on the network. It kind of highlights our own mistakes.
For an advanced network operations center, Auvik is very easy to use and super easy to deploy. It is intuitive, and its features are very useful to an extent. When it comes to a more advanced network team, there are things that Auvik doesn't do. Doing those things would make it awesome, but they would just make the platform more complex and probably less easy to use. So, for the fundamentals, Auvik does a fantastic job. Once you go beyond the fundamentals, Auvik still does a pretty good job, but there are some things that I would not be surprised that the platform will never do. That's because it is not intended to be Cisco DNA Center. It is intended to be a broad platform that supports everything to a degree.
For an unsophisticated or a very small network team, I would give it a nine out of 10 because of ease of use. A managed service provider is a good example because the folks who consume the product are not network specialists. They primarily used it for backup, mapping, KPIs, and assisting in troubleshooting. For mid-range organizations, it is a solid nine. For advanced networking teams, it is probably a five because it is not going to give you all the information that you want. It is not going to do all of the things that you might want it to do, but the things that it does, it does very well.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Chief Executive Officer at Shield Technologies
Impressive network discovery capabilities, good integration with other tools, and flexible and reasonable pricing
Pros and Cons
- "Its network discovery capabilities are very impressive. The discovery piece is amazing. I don't know if they have an AI or some type of advanced intelligence inside of their program that helps with the discovery piece. I haven't seen anything that discovers products that well and is able to label them, tag them, and pull as much information about them. I don't know what drives that engine, but I'm just absolutely blown away by it. It is cool."
- "I'm one of the biggest Auvik fans out there."
- "Some of the automation pieces for discovery still need a little bit more improvement. I wouldn't mind seeing some more security features as that's the world we're driving into. I know Auvik probably wants to try to keep itself separate because that's its brand, but even if they brought on board another brand that was able to plug into them, it would benefit us. It would lower some more network security costs if as a company, they are a one-stop shop. They have already got the network piece going. If they improved in that area and focused a lot on that, they would gain me as a customer, and they would probably gain a lot of others."
- "Some of the automation pieces for discovery still need a little bit more improvement."
What is our primary use case?
I'm one of the biggest Auvik fans out there. I have used it personally, and I have brought it to every single company since 2015 as a product offering or for the internal use case. I currently own a firm, and I am yet to talk with Auvik. When the time comes, I will absolutely be doing its implementation for my company, and I will be offering Auvik to my customers.
I did its implementation for a company in the November of the last year. NetFlow was one of the biggest use cases, and it was for monitoring the type of traffic inside the network. We were also able to do a lot of Syslogging, and with one pane of glass, we were able to remote into the various routers and switches that we had.
It was deployed via Windows services and not as a virtual box inside VMware, which is probably better. We also had a cloud collection point, which was also a failover in our Chicago environment. I was deployed for five different sites along with the NetFlow application.
How has it helped my organization?
Auvik provided one of our clients the ability to see the network in its entirety. We were seamlessly able to implement an encryption deployment because we could see the whole network from a bird's eye view. It was internally implemented, so it didn't really help us in terms of performance, but it improved the productivity of the project on which we were working.
In terms of whether the automation of network mapping enabled junior network specialists to resolve issues directly and freed up senior-level team members to perform higher-value tasks, as an IT Manager, it has allowed me to delegate tasks. What was nice was that a lot of people were annoyed that Auvik just didn't combine everything, and everything was slow when Auvik did combine the whole map. When we broke it out the way Auvik told us to, which was by the site, it allowed me to actually assign a small networking team of two or three personnel essentially to that specific location. Everybody knew what exact equipment they were responsible for, and then it just trickled down to all of the other systems and processes. This made the communication more effective. We could hand off jobs and shifts at almost a seamless rate. When it came to documentation and password inside of Auvik, I knew and felt that they were secure. It has definitely decreased our mean time to resolution. It improved our overall productivity by at least 20%.
Its TrafficInsights feature shows the network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive, in-line traffic decryption. Most of the time, I'm able to get a pretty detailed kind of report or visionary on it. This feature is extremely important. From a managerial standpoint, we wanted to know what people were doing. The pandemic was huge for a lot of work for home people, and we wanted to know what our employees were doing on their computers at home. While they were connected to the VPN, Auvik provided us the ability to see whether they were watching Netflix and things like that, or what other type of bandwidth they were taking up. It was very amazing. We were canning people over it, and we were utilizing it to kind of take a temperature of our culture.
The TrafficInsights feature is helpful in showing where your system is experiencing performance issues. When we have a network problem, I'm able to see where and what's causing it. Back in October, we had some sort of network storm on our layer 3 in Chicago, and we were able to pinpoint different types of traffic going on. It was nothing, and packets were coming back at zero bits and different bits, and it was just noise. We were able to figure out that there was a loop somewhere. We had to physically go down and examine it, but without it, we probably would have chased our tails around or spent a lot more money than we did to resolve the issue.
The TrafficInsights feature has helped in improving our network performance. It improved our understanding of the network and what was going on. It helped us utilize other tools that were in place to block traffic, allow different traffic, or redirect different traffic.
It provides automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backups. I had to go in and do some configuration myself, but it was very simple. It automatically pulled the configuration from the device, and I could download it from Auvik. It probably saved me a couple of hours a week. At $100 or $200 an hour, it could save you a couple of thousand bucks a year.
It has definitely enabled us to consolidate and integrate other tools. Auvik integrates really well with other tools such as Lucidchart and different PSAs such as ConnectWise. With that, I can just utilize more functions inside these solutions. I don't necessarily have to have my Lucidchart. It integrates well where I don't have to add any more products. It is kind of that last missing link theme. It takes away from having to purchase a Visio chart, individually go and pull network reports, or have a product at each site that does that. It has this overarching big brother side. Not having to spend on these tools has probably saved us $10,000 to $20,000 annually in licensing costs. These are the software that you got to get rid of, and they are probably about $10,000 per piece.
What is most valuable?
NetFlow is probably one of the most valuable features. Since starting with Auvik, and seeing how far it has come, NetFlow has been one of the most valuable features. This feature is important because as a network administrator, you always want to examine what type of traffic is going on. You can limit users from watching Netflix on a route, or you can also pinpoint malicious activity going on in the network. So, I really do find Auvik to be a utility, not only from a network standpoint but also from a security standpoint. It provides a very good security feature in a way even though it is not branded like that.
Towards the actual Auvik side or the networking side, one of the most valuable features is its capability to quickly go out, discover, and have the intelligence to either utilize known usernames and passwords (when it comes to SNMP) or ask for the proper credentials. If they weren't provided, then it provides information about how to go retrieve them. When you examine the whole workflow or compare it to SolarWinds Orion, which got hacked, Auvik blows it out of the water because of this feature. This feature is important because when you're monitoring multiple locations and managing multiple employees, it is important to have that piece fit inside of that business continuity. I like to involve those things in security and business continuity when I am selling, deploying, or implementing it, thus making it the culture behind the product.
Its network discovery capabilities are very impressive. The discovery piece is amazing. I don't know if they have an AI or some type of advanced intelligence inside of their program that helps with the discovery piece. I haven't seen anything that discovers products that well and is able to label them, tag them, and pull as much information about them. I don't know what drives that engine, but I'm just absolutely blown away by it. It is cool.
Its ease of use is great. I was very pleased with how the junior employees, and even a couple of senior employees who had not worked with the product, were able to jump in, learn quickly, and work through the interface.
What needs improvement?
Some of the automation pieces for discovery still need a little bit more improvement. I wouldn't mind seeing some more security features as that's the world we're driving into. I know Auvik probably wants to try to keep itself separate because that's its brand, but even if they brought on board another brand that was able to plug into them, it would benefit us. It would lower some more network security costs if as a company, they are a one-stop shop. They have already got the network piece going. If they improved in that area and focused a lot on that, they would gain me as a customer, and they would probably gain a lot of others.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Auvik since 2015.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I've been pretty impressed with its stability. I've been with Auvik for such a long time, and they've improved over the years. That's why I have nothing bad to say about them. Its stability in 2015 was great, but now with the redundancy and this cloud thing that they've got going, it is even more impressive.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
They've improved it in that area a lot. It is scalable now.
In the previous job, we only paid for 20 billable endpoints, but we had more than 100 endpoints. We had three users. My title there was a senior systems architect, and then I had a network engineer under me. Above me was my boss who was the Chief Information Officer.
If I had to rate its usage on a scale of one to 10 with 10 being eight hours a day and one being twice a week, they would probably fall in the five range. They probably use it four out of five days and for an hour or an hour and a half a day.
Currently, I don't have it as an offering in my own company. We are brand new, and I just opened this firm this year in February. As we get the ground and the ball rolling, we will be an Auvik customer within the next six months for sure.
How are customer service and technical support?
Their technical support is the best. You can talk to an Auvik support technician about something Cisco-related. They don't have to, but they are very knowledgeable in that technology, which is so impressive.
I'm glad, and I'm sure that Auvik hires nothing but educated people, which is probably why it's just that much better of an experience. I can talk to them, and they know what I'm talking about. A lot of the things that we talk about are complex things related to the Cisco technology, FortiGate, etc.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
In the previous job, we had a third-party firm called Transcendent, and they resold SolarWinds Orion, but it was not good. I replaced it shortly with Auvik after Orion was hacked, and then we integrated their team into the product. We had it all on-prem, but we utilized this hybrid thing that Auvik had. If our on-prem collector went down, we weren't completely blind. We had redundancy built into it.
It makes me so much happier to be an Auvik customer and a champion of the product. I'm really glad that Auvik hasn't been touched like SolarWinds Orion. It gives me the confidence to keep utilizing and selling their products.
Auvik automatically updates the network topology at an interval of approximately 60 seconds, and you can also go in there and forcefully update it. We, however, never really relied on that technology. You could click on a spot, and it was a 50:50 shot if we had to move in and relabel it, which was better than SolarWinds where you get a 10% chance of getting it right. So, you're doing 90% of the configuration in SolarWinds versus having to do 40 to 50% in Auvik. That's why Auvik is better.
How was the initial setup?
It was pretty complex. When you are setting up Auvik, you can set up the collector, which is straightforward. However, when you are trying to set up your router and switches, you have to have at least an associate-level degree in Cisco networking, for example, to understand the commands and the things that you need to do to prepare your router or firewall to work or integrate into the Auvik system. You need somebody who knows networking. When it comes to finding those people, they're expensive. It is probably cheaper to go through Auvik's offering at that point. If you have them on staff, utilize them. So, it is complicated, but it is no fault of their own. Auvik was easy, but they can't really control Cisco or the other people who have their technology.
The deployment probably took about two weeks. In terms of comparing the setup time of Auvik with other solutions, Auvik allowed me to do it from one location and in my chair. For other locations, I probably would have had to travel at least twice with a SolarWinds solution. I would have had to deploy it on physical hardware at that location and then use my Cisco DMVPN to make everything toss, which isn't really all that cool or modern. So, Auvik saves me traveling time and money, and I am able to do it from one location. Such cost savings probably translate to $10,000.
Our implementation strategy was to start with our home office, which was our data center here in Milwaukee, and then to set up a redundant site in Chicago. We discovered there, and then we went by the office and deployed it office by office through discovery. We didn't move to the next office till every piece of equipment was accounted for, labeled, and documented.
What about the implementation team?
I have not used any third-party integrator. I did it myself. I also did all the maintenance, which included server maintenance, different updates, patches, backups, etc.
What was our ROI?
They weren't like that, but I can tell you that they've made it.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The cost for all the devices that we were billed at in my last job was about $2500 annually. It wasn't much.
It has the most reasonable pricing as compared to any product out there. I can't complain. It is amazing. It allows me to bundle inside the package what I charge customers per user per month. I don't charge them per device anymore. That's not how we do things in the industry. It is per user per month. The way Auvik is charging us allows me to do it. For example, if they charge $250 for a certain number of seats, I'm just going to write the costs onto per user per month. I have a few leftover licenses to use, which allows me to go out and make some more sales and give some freebies at some shows. So, it makes me very flexible. I am very happy with it.
It is billed by network devices. You could choose which billable device you want. What is really nice is that if you don't want one switch to be billable and the other one to be billable, you can do that. You just won't have the features that the billable switch has, which isn't horrible. Sometimes, you don't need that. What I'm really happy about is that Auvik doesn't force things on you and doesn't say, "You have to have all of this," and that's a great business model.
Sometimes, you can get overages if you go over your agreement per device, but they don't try to nickel-and-dime you on it. They're very reasonable, and it is easy to go in and look and see. They harp on it too. They ask you to go in and check and make sure you have what you want because you have this many licenses.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
They didn't evaluate any other product.
What other advice do I have?
To anybody utilizing it internally, I would advise going through Auvik directly. You'll pay a little bit more, but you'll have the support as an IT staff unless you want to come through a company like me. Auvik has just recently opened up their company to accept companies that want to utilize it internally. As a consultant with the landscape that I'm looking at right now, I advise Auvik to keep pricing in the same way.
I would advise taking your time and doing your implementation right the first time. You're going to gain more knowledge about your network, and the people coming after you are going to be able to support your network that much easier.
Its ease of use is great, but I firmly believe that if you don't have experience in networking, you're going to fail. If you don't take the time or pay the money to sit down with Auvik and have them teach you to utilize the tool, you're doing yourself a disservice because of what and how inexpensive it is to get the tool and how valuable it is to have their time to teach you how to utilize the tool. They have an implementation team that will walk you through it. You have to pay for this service separately. I utilized this service once, and I've been able to implement it myself. I would highly recommend that somebody without experience should pay for this service at least once in their career.
It doesn't really help us put out fires before people or end-users even get to know that there is a problem. That could be because of the customers that I've had. However, Auvik does allow me to pinpoint the problem right away. I may get the alert two minutes later than my customer alerted me, but I'm able to get a fast resolution in place right away. It is easy. So, that's what I'm very happy about.
As a seller of Auvik, the cost-savings that it provides allow me to be more mobile. I don't have to hire as many employees because I can have them sitting in a chair watching a dashboard, which saves cost. If I'm a customer myself, I don't really see cost savings, and it is just another tool for my IT guys to be successful. So, it doesn't really save costs, but at the same time, it has a positive impact on the network.
As a consultant, Auvik has shown me the habits of end-users or IT staff. For example, Auvik has been able to pick up on rogue, small six-port switches that get plugged in somewhere under somebody's desk. I am also able to see the weird things that get plugged in or turned on in the network. I am also able to have conversations, but it is just weird to see how that technology or software translates to the behavior of these people. It is kind of neat.
Its time to value is what it is. There is a cost to everything, and there is really no value when it comes to implementation. Especially with how I am going to have it implemented in my environment, I have to ask somebody with a reasonable amount of knowledge, and he is going to cost me $80,000 to $100,000 a year to go out and implement. It is just a cost, and there is really no way around it.
I would rate Auvik a 10 out of 10.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
Sr. Network Security Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Builds and updates network topology in real time, making that information immediately available
Pros and Cons
- "One of the best things about Auvik, and it's why it's one of my go-to products, are the remote access capabilities. Without a VPN and without any other way in, I'm able to get in and work on and troubleshoot my devices through the remote access console. It has multiple options for that and has been very useful and a huge time-saver. That's one of the killer features. It's one of my must-haves and that's why I like it so much."
- "The automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backup capability is one of the key features for me in Auvik. To manage a network, one of my key requirements is to be able to rebuild that network if something catastrophic happens. Having up-to-date backups is a must, and this is a tool that I count on to get that right, and it has always performed as I expect."
- "Overall, compared to everything else out there, it's a solid 10 out of 10."
- "The logging features could be a little bit better polished, although that aspect is relatively new. It comes in as raw data, with different formats for different vendors. It's not immediately clear to people what's going on with some of that and you have to read through the codes. Some of the higher-end logging solutions, like Splunk, which is very expensive, can parse through it and correlate items better. Improvement to the logging features would be a value-add, but I'm still very happy that it exists."
- "There are a few edge cases where I have found support for devices to be a little bit lacking."
What is our primary use case?
I do internal IT for a company and I use Auvik for most of my daily tasks as they relate to firewalls, switches, and routing.
How has it helped my organization?
The automation of network mapping enables junior network specialists to resolve issues directly and helps to free up senior-level team members to perform more involved tasks. It can be a key tool in environments where somebody who doesn't have a strong network skillset can go in and see, "Is it good, is it not?" and be able to make a decision on whether it needs to be escalated to me or not.
It also automatically updates network topology. One of the things that I really enjoy doing, when I first get into a new environment with it, is to watch it rebuild the map as it learns in real time. I can see its process and for me, as a very technical guy, that is one of the most entertaining things to watch, as it learns and updates the changes in a network in real time. It saves time maintaining network topology since the tool actually does it automatically. I have a high level of confidence that the information is correct, and it is immediately available. Just last week, I got a call from one of our internal auditors who needed to provide some information. He said, "Yeah, this usually takes a few weeks. Can you provide firmware information and serial numbers?" During our phone call, I was able to get into Auvik, pull the list, get it sent over to him and say, "Here you go. We're done."
Auvik has also decreased our mean time to resolution. Being able to go in and look at what's not broken, very quickly, and get that confirmed, means that I can look at what I actually need to fix. It eliminates a whole bunch of other problems and a whole bunch of checking. It has reduced our MTTR by up to 80 percent in some cases.
And because we've got it triggering PagerDuty alerts, if something problematic really fires off, I will know about it and be in the tool looking at what's going. I can say, "Hey, this is a problem we need to alert," or, "This isn't a problem and we just need to be aware," very quickly.
Another benefit is the TrafficInsights feature which shows network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive, in-line traffic decryption, and it does it very well. That is a very nice-to-have in my current role because we don't have issues with our network bandwidth. But in other environments that I've been in, where there were issues with bandwidth, it is a very well-put-together tool allowing me to find the answer and say, "This is what our problem is." It enables me to tell the business that we either need to spend more money on bandwidth, or we need to deprioritize a certain type of traffic. It gives that information in a format in which I can give it to somebody who is less technical than me. I can show them the graph and say, "This is what's going on and why."
TrafficInsights helps to show you where your system is experiencing performance issues around capacity and what is the busiest traffic. It can help improve network performance by letting me know exactly what's going on. It lets me see whether it is an application misbehaving, a lack of bandwidth, an upgrade that we need to make, or a configuration. It gives me these choices so that I know for real what's going on. In some cases, people "feel" that something is going on, but this gives me the facts to know what's going on. I would estimate TrafficInsights has improved our network performance by 50 percent.
In multiple environments I've been in, we've been able to eliminate other tools and use Auvik as our single network management solution. In those environments, I've had up to five tools that I have been able to decommission by using Auvik. In that environment where there were so many tools in place, replacing them probably saved $100,000 a year.
What is most valuable?
Some of the key features that I get out of it are that it is a well-rounded monitoring solution, so I know when something fails—whether it's a device or a service on the device. But it also performs backup, in inventory, of some of the key things to control and manage the network.
And one of the best things about Auvik, and it's why it's one of my go-to products, are the remote access capabilities. Without a VPN and without any other way in, I'm able to get in and work on and troubleshoot my devices through the remote access console. It has multiple options for that and has been very useful and a huge time-saver. That's one of the killer features. It's one of my must-haves and that's why I like it so much.
In addition, for products in this category, Auvik's ease of use is one of the best. It's really built for people like me. I'm heavy into the parts of IT that are not server-related, including routing, switching, firewalls, et cetera, and it is organized for somebody like me. It is the network engineer's toolset. It gives me what I need upfront in a way that I understand well. Auvik speaks my language.
When it comes to its network discovery capabilities, It is the best that can happen. I've used it in multiple environments, and as long as I've got the right starter information, it can go find information in an hour that would otherwise take a person weeks. It's very good and very quick. I've been able to benchmark it against competitive tools and it is way more useful, giving me information that I actually need and can use.
The automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backup capability is one of the key features for me in Auvik. To manage a network, one of my key requirements is to be able to rebuild that network if something catastrophic happens. Having up-to-date backups is a must, and this is a tool that I count on to get that right, and it has always performed as I expect. I am able to very quickly and easily audit that the backups happen and I know that they're there. I can also restore to a previous point with very little hassle, if anything goes wrong. Compared to other backup solutions, it saves me 80 percent in terms of my time.
What needs improvement?
The logging features could be a little bit better polished, although that aspect is relatively new. It comes in as raw data, with different formats for different vendors. It's not immediately clear to people what's going on with some of that and you have to read through the codes. Some of the higher-end logging solutions, like Splunk, which is very expensive, can parse through it and correlate items better. Improvement to the logging features would be a value-add, but I'm still very happy that it exists.
There are a few edge cases where I have found support for devices to be a little bit lacking. I'm migrating away from Check Point right now and Auvik and Check Point do not get along at all, so it was very troublesome to get those put in place.
Another issue that I know is already in progress, but that will be very nice, is full integration with PagerDuty. I'm using email connectors right now that have a little bit of a lag, so once the APIs are in place between Auvik and PagerDuty, it will give me better alerting when something breaks. I know that's on the roadmap because I've talked to them about it.
For how long have I used the solution?
Between two different companies, I've been using Auvik for about three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The availability is 99 percent. They do have maintenance windows where it's not available. I've been happy with their communication on the maintenance windows and they pick the times very well when it's not going to be available. I realize that everyone needs maintenance, but it works out very well.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I've used this for everything from companies that are in a single building up to a company that had offices in 20 time zones with almost 100 offices, some of them with 1,000 users, and it was able to scale up to that. I've never had worries about how big this can go.
How are customer service and technical support?
Their technical support is fair to good. There have been a few times where I've had to escalate to somebody higher, when I thought the lower-level person should have understood it, but I've always ended up with a good answer.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is straightforward and, as far as the product category is concerned, it's the most straightforward. I've used this in an MSP environment and I've done deployments into close to 30 companies with Auvik and it is, by far, the fastest way to do it for a fresh deployment.
We can get the initial install going in a few hours and we can be confident in the data in a week or two. Comparing that to other tools, it would be an initial deployment of a week or two and two months until we're confident with our data. It has probably reduced the time spent on setup by 90 percent. And when dealing with an MSP, it cuts down a client onboarding by at least a month, which lets revenue start coming in earlier.
The implementation strategy depends on the size of the environment that we're going into, but we usually put in collectors at key locations and first let them do their discovery and see what's out there. Then we'll tune them down so that the collectors are monitoring from the right locations. But we like to get as much data in as possible, initially, and then tune downward.
As a cloud-based solution, it requires just about no maintenance and that's one of the other benefits of Auvik. With other solutions, we have spent more time updating and babysitting the servers and fixing our tools, instead of fixing our environment. That's a major plus.
What was our ROI?
When I was first evaluating it and we were going through pricing models, I was able to make the case that, for a team of five, this would be better than adding a person to the team when it comes to getting work done.
When I was new in this environment, I was trying to get a lot of stuff together. I brought Auvik as a solution to my supervisor and said, "This is what we used at my last company," and he was familiar with my last company. He viewed them as very good at what they do. I suggested we take a look at Auvik. As soon as he got the pricing during the first sales call around Auvik, he said, "Sold. Well worth that money." They didn't even have to finish the presentation. He saw what was being offered and he also based his decision on the fact that I'd used it before. The cost easily made it worth it in his mind for what it would provide to us.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing is fair for the value and time saved that you get out of it. The larger you go, the more sense it makes per device, because as you hit different pricing tiers, it becomes much more affordable per device.
Auvik is billed by network device. They've got a very clear-cut definition of what is a device and what isn't a device, and that's very convenient. Anything like a server, or a phone, or an access point, is not billed but they are still captured for data, which is very useful. Auvik is very upfront that the solution is not a good server monitoring platform, but it's a fair server monitoring platform and that comes along for free with everything else. My server guys have another system they use for monitoring servers, but they find being able to look at Auvik as well has been a huge value-add.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I have used LogicMonitor, PRTG, the N-central suite, the ManageEngine suite, and the SolarWinds products.
In terms of the differences between those solutions and Auvik, I would summarize them this way: Auvik is a tool built for the network guys, primarily, whereas a lot of other tools are built for the server guys first and then add in network. It's a tool really built for what I care about and it values my time. I'm able to get it put in fast, I'm able to use it fast, and my information is fast. It lets me do more with less.
What other advice do I have?
Definitely go through the proof of concept testing. The results speak for themselves. It's a fully rounded product and everyone I know who has used it has been happy with it.
When you're first deploying it, understand how you need to set up your locations. Otherwise, you're going to end up redoing work. If you're in a larger environment, you need a little bit of knowledge about where things are to be able to put stuff in the right places. If you're small, you can just drop it in and be super-happy with what it gives to you.
Overall, compared to everything else out there, it's a solid 10 out of 10. I haven't found anything that gives me what I need better.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Head of Global Network at SIS Securitas
Its network topology has reduced the number of failures in our operations
Pros and Cons
- "Auvik automatically updates network topology. Since it automatically updates the topology, we proactively know what is happening in a country or our branch offices. It also alerts us if there is a topology change, e.g., if it discovers anything new in that country. So, it has reduced the number of failures in our operations. We went from being reactive to proactive. So, we are no longer reacting to what is happening and others are doing. This has saved us about two to three hours a day. We used to spend two to three hours every morning checking the firewall and router logs for malicious behavior."
- "This has really changed our network operations."
- "They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game."
- "They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik."
What is our primary use case?
We are a multinational company in almost 55 countries. One of the reasons why we selected Auvik was we wanted to have insights into our networks. Ultimately, we can control them at a central level. Auvik was the best fit because it has:
- A cloud-based solution using a SaaS model.
- Visibility into end users using tools.
- Terminal auto-connect, where we can connect devices from Auvik.
- Some sort of an audit.
- Backup consultations in the tool, which it maintains.
It has really eased our life in terms of network operations.
How has it helped my organization?
It is improving our network operations in 55 countries, including the US, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Oceania.
Auvik automatically updates network topology. Since it automatically updates the topology, we proactively know what is happening in a country or our branch offices. It also alerts us if there is a topology change, e.g., if it discovers anything new in that country. So, it has reduced the number of failures in our operations. We went from being reactive to proactive. So, we are no longer reacting to what is happening and others are doing. This has saved us about two to three hours a day. We used to spend two to three hours every morning checking the firewall and router logs for malicious behavior.
The automation of network mapping enables our junior network specialists to resolve issues directly, freeing up senior-level team members to perform higher-value tasks. The type of views that we have Auvik automatically discovering has helped our operations, as issues get resolved at Level 1 or 2 with the help of the topology. They don't go to Level 3 until they are serious.
Auvik has decreased our mean time to resolution. Around three years back, there always used to be a heavy load on Level 3. Nowadays, in a month, there are maximum two tickets that reach Level 3. They all get sorted out in Level 1 and 2.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is the auditing part. Whenever we are doing any changes, it captures those changes. Date-wise, if we want to refer back to them, we just need to view the date when we did those changes and it will give us a comparison of what has been changed from the last concept.
The Auvik terminal's service is a value-add to our operations.
It is very user-friendly. It is easy to use, understand, and deploy. My guys have not taken any training from Auvik, but we have learned the systems quite quickly. Because it is user-friendly, you don't need professional training for it.
Auvik's network discovery capabilities are awesome. It not only discovers the network, but it also gives you a map by designing how your network will look like in your environment.
Auvik has very good alerting modules. If a connection or device goes down, it alerts us right away. A good part of that alert is it has some sort of intelligence mechanism. For example, if the router or network device has some sort of malicious activity or critical issue, then it alerts us upfront. It will say, "Hey, you have some issues that you might need to check." It alerts us to critical elements before something bad happens.
What needs improvement?
They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game.
I have already talked with the CEO of Auvik about this. He agreed that he will be working on getting some reporting systems in Auvik. As of now, they only have reporting via Power BI, and it is an additional cost to get the Power BI licenses. Another drawback, the Power BI reporting is not that accurate and you really have to struggle to get the reports.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Auvik for three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is a SaaS-based tool. Auvik takes care of their hosting environment. So far, I found this solution to be more stable compared to other tools that we have used on-premises.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is good. An important thing about Auvik is that this tool is available from anywhere. For example, we are in a pandemic situation today and forced to work from home. Auvik gives us the capability to do our network operations from anywhere. This is one of the important features that I like about Auvik. For the on-premise solution, you have to make sure you are in the company network and have the VPN connected with the resources.
In my department, we have 46 people using it.
We are expanding Auvik into other countries. For now, we have expanded it into Europe and Asia as well as starting to expand it into the US. So, we will have a long journey using Auvik.
How are customer service and technical support?
Their technical support is good. They need some improvement. They are not quick. Whenever we raised an issue with Auvik, which was two or three times, the technical support was a bit slow in responding to our issues.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We used to manage the firewall and routers manually, connecting to the countries' VPN. Today, we don't need to have them connected. We can just manage it from a single Auvik console. This has really changed our network operations.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is an easy, straightforward process. You just need to download the Auvik collector, and it is just three steps: next, next, and next. Then, it is complete. From the employee perspective, it saves you at least four to five hours. Other tools take people a working day to deploy one site. Whereas, Auvik takes just a few minutes. The reason for that is they have their automated discovery capabilities, where you just put in your SNMP credentials.
What about the implementation team?
I deployed myself in five minutes.
What was our ROI?
Three years ago, we used to work out of the office for hours doing maintenance, like patching and upgrading tools. My guys are no longer doing night duty for operations like that. We don't do any maintenance on Auvik because it is done by Auvik.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Compared to other products, Auvik's pricing is more feasible since you get all its features. You pay for licenses on a per network device basis. It monitors hypervisors, but does not bill for that. There are no additional costs, which is something that I like.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did evaluate a couple of tools, both on-premises and cloud, then we decided to go with Auvik.
Auvik works smoothly compared to other tools. It also discovers the entire network in a respective area, then Auvik maps it automatically and gives you a good topology. This was a key factor in our decision.
What other advice do I have?
Auvik is for any networking department. If you have a very complex network or a lot of devices that need to be monitored, Auvik would be the best fit. Auvik is not for a simple environment. If you have 10 devices or 10 branch/site offices, then Auvik is not a good fit because it will become expensive.
We are still in the testing phase of the TrafficInsights feature, which gives you full visibility into what is happening on your network. Also, the TrafficInsights feature will help you to say where protocols or services are consumed heavily. In the long run, it helps you to optimize your bandwidth based on your country consumption. It gives you a lot of details and integrated traffic insight, which we unfortunately need to hold back on because of data protection laws.
It doesn't configure out-of-the-box automatically. That is a manual job.
For an enterprise environment, I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Works at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Good dashboard and visibility with a pretty straightforward setup
Pros and Cons
- "The product has helped to decrease our main time to resolution by 50%."
- "The solution's interface isn't the most user friendly, however, once you get used to it and once you get into the groove and have a little bit of experience, it's pretty nice."
What is our primary use case?
I'm a systems engineer, so I use it for troubleshooting and for doing research, and baseline functions like figuring out network layouts and things of that nature.
How has it helped my organization?
Making it easier to review and confirm network components and status.
What is most valuable?
What I really use the most is probably the devices section. The map is very helpful to me as well in my role.
I use the dashboard occasionally, and for the purposes that use it, it's pretty functional. It's pretty straightforward to use the network map and the dashboard.
I do get network visibility. For my purposes, it was partial. I do have to dive in to get some of the visibility I require.
The benefits witnessed were pretty much immediate after we deployed it. When we deploy to a new client, the benefits show themselves right away.
Auvik doesn't necessarily allow entry-level technicians to solve tickets on their own. You do need a little bit of experience with it. That said, once you do, it's very useful for technicians.
The product has helped to decrease our main time to resolution by 50%.
Auvik allows us to spend less time on setup, maintenance, and issue resolution. It saves me time in that I could dive in and get some answers that I would normally have to go through a couple of other portals to get to. I could find information that I needed from multiple spots just by going into Auvik.
What needs improvement?
The solution's interface isn't the most user friendly, however, once you get used to it and once you get into the groove and have a little bit of experience, it's pretty nice. For a novice coming into it, it's more difficult. The layout just isn't the most intuitive.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used the solution since 2019.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I've never run into any stability issues.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The product is scalable. I've never had issues with our larger network.
How are customer service and support?
I've never directly worked with technical support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I haven't used any other similar solutions.
How was the initial setup?
I am occassionally involved in the deployment, however, not very often. It is easy to implement. It doesn't take long at all to get up and running. It takes less than an hour.
There is some cleanup that needs to be done occasionally. Sometimes, when devices are decommissioned, they don't properly remove them, so we do need to manage that.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I'm not familiar with the pricing or licensing.
What other advice do I have?
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I would advise new users to poke through the menus to familiarize themselves with it. When I first started using it and I found when people first started using it, it was a little bit overwhelming. That said, once you get familiar with it, it's a very helpful tool.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Last updated: Aug 20, 2026
Flag as inappropriateBuyer's Guide
Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: October 2026
Product Categories
Network Monitoring Software IT Infrastructure Monitoring Network Troubleshooting Cloud Monitoring Software Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)Popular Comparisons
Splunk AppDynamics
SolarWinds NPM
Splunk Observability Cloud
PRTG Network Monitor
NETSCOUT Network & Application Observability
WhatsUp Gold
LogicMonitor
Elastic Observability
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- When evaluating Network Performance Monitoring, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
- What Questions Should I Ask Before Buying a Network Monitoring Tool?
- UIM OnPrem - SaaS
- Anyone switching from SolarWinds NPM? What is a good alternative and why?
- What is the best tool for SQL monitoring in a large enterprise?
- What tool do you recommend using for VoIP monitoring for a mid-sized enterprise?
- Should we choose Nagios or PRTG?
- Which is the best network monitoring tool: Zabbix or Solarwinds? Pros and Cons?
- What software solution would you recommend to monitor user machines?

















